RMweb Gold Huw Griffiths Posted January 16, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 16, 2017 As the thread title suggests, I wonder how many of us have made serious attempts at building new models, even though we know there's no way our effors can ever be spot-on accurate. I'm not talking about deliberately "freelance" models, "bitsa" models and the like, of no prototype whatsoever. I'm also not talking about "yellow peril" (and similar) "critter" builds, where the emphasis has been on using an available (and almost certainly cheap) chassis as the basis of some simple and hastily assembled "Franken-lok". All of this stuff is very interesting - and I'd welcome the chance to read about / see pictures of stuff like this in another thread - but it isn't what I've got in mind here. So much for what I'm not talking about - I've actually got something rather different in mind here - and it's probably best illustrated by a concept that's been buzzing around in my head for a number of years. Early in the 20th century, a number of railways were experimenting with petrol and diesel powered railbuses, of varying degrees of complexity and refinement. Many of these were scrapped many years before I was born - often with very little in the way of accurate drawings, clear photos and similar documentation becoming widely available. A number of these were kept away from regular passenger service - classic examples of this being 4, very small, "petrol motor inspection cars" - built by / for the NER / LNER between 1908 and 1923 - and all condemned before the outbreak of the Second World War. Although I've come across a couple of photos on the internet - and (less than stellar) drawings in a diagram book, I haven't come across much in the way of good information readily available (certainly without an inordinate amount of effort / cost). What this means is that, if I were to attempt to build a model of one of these vehicles at a reasonable cost, a considerable amount of guesswork would probably be needed - and, almost certainly, a lot of "kitbashing" of something very much like Ian Kirk coach kit panels. At the end of this, I'd probably have a rather attractive model - but there's no way I'd ever be able to build an accurate, high quality, model, based on the information currently available to me. This would obviously present me with something of a dilemma - should I bother trying to build the best model I can, knowing it can't possibly be accurate - should I build something deliberately freelance, taking cues from the NER inspection railcars and other companies' vehicles (built or planned) of a similar vintage - or should I just forget the whole idea as a bad lot? Right now, I haven't decided - and I probably won't for a while yet. Also, I probably won't be swayed by other people's views. To be brutally honest, I shouldn't be - after all, if I build it, I'll be spending my money and my time - it would be my project, my hobby, my decision. I'm just wondering if anyone else has found themselves in a similar position - and if they're willing to talk about it. Either that, or am I just being plain stupid? I wonder. Huw. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted January 16, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 16, 2017 I don't see anything wrong with creating a model that captures the flavour of a prototype without being a precise replica of it. Hundreds of us have been bashing Tri-ang clerestories and Ratio or Kirk coach sides into close (and sometimes, not-so-close) representations of what we really want for decades. You obviously aren't the type that would claim the resulting model to be anything it isn't, so more power to your elbow. My own "bete noir" (literally), in my distant past, was to carve a J83 into what I consider (even with hindsight) to have been a reasonable approximation of a ex-LSWR G6. Regards John Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Johnster Posted January 16, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 16, 2017 In my early teens, I was guilty of making what I delusionally called a 56xx out of a Triang Jinty chassis, actually from what purported to be an 08 but we didn't call them that then, and an Airfix construction kit 61xx, bodged (and I mean that in the worst sense of the word) up with some balsa to make up the height difference in the tanks and with a card footplate. I didn't even bother to do anything about the cab roof profile. Not even at a distance in a poor light did this thing cut the mustard. I suppose the exercise was valuable in that it taught me never to attempt something as daft again... I also, slightly less unsuccessfully, made something vaguely resembling a 43xx from the other half of the 61xx and a CoT, and briefly got it to run with a tender drive. This actually taught me a bit about modelling, because I had to make up new cab side sheets and the rear of the running plate out of the new wonder material the magazines were all raving about, plastikard. So, given the sins of my youth, I for one am certainly not in a position to criticise your effort at a 'petrol inspection motor car' which, even if you cannot state authoritatively that it is an accurate scale model, will at least be built as accurately as you can to the best of your information and, as I very much doubt anyone else is doing it, will be the best in the world. What you are doing is proper modelling by any standards; you have nothing to be ashamed of. Unlike me, who will never be able to repay my debt to modelling society for the horror that was my 56xx... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim V Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 Build it, exhibit it, and wait for the flack. Of course, having built it, someone will come along with the drawing you need, but you'll only get that by publicising it! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cal.n Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 I am currently finishing a OO Network Rail Road-Rail Landrover Defender (motorized), based on a prototype based at Fort William (I have seen it a few times while walking from Corrour). In the very early stages of building it, I realized I was building a chassis to fit my Oxford Diecast Short Wheelbase version while the prototype was a long wheelbase. At this point, I had already modified the body so that it could not be turned back into any short wheelbase version on the network. So, I went along with it and I am now finishing it knowing it will never be accurate. I have now decided to finish version 1 and then make the same prototype again. This should hopefully feature a correct wheelbase, DCC and lights. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Dunsignalling Posted January 16, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 16, 2017 Build it, exhibit it, and wait for the flack. Of course, having built it, someone will come along with the drawing you need, but you'll only get that by publicising it! Very true If modelling a real location, the golden rule is that anything you don't have the full gen on shouldn't be glued down too firmly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold phil_sutters Posted January 16, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 16, 2017 If you go back to the days of my youth - the 1960s since you ask - one often ended up doing conversions, which you knew you didn't have the skills to do much more than create a fair impression of the prototype. If you were good enough to get an accurate end product, you would probably have done a scratch-built job, or found an expensive brass kit, if there was one. These are a couple of my conversions, after the Highbridge Vicarage layout was disbanded, parked on a temporary diorama. The 7F was a scratch-built plasticard & brass tube body on a Hornby Dublo 8F chassis, with a slightly modified tender. The Fox Walker was a very limited conversion from the Wills GWR 1804 ST. The coal wagons were hand painted & lettered Triang converter wagons and most of the rest of the stock was scratch-built with white metal castings below the solebar. The six-wheeled pw gang's stores truck was created from memory of a photo of a model in a copy of MRN or MRC that had already gone - probably to light a fire. I still have all these items - which is why I haven't bought all the r-t-r stock now available - 7F, 4F, 3F, 2P, Jinty, - I don't want to show up my old friends! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernard Lamb Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 I have always wanted to build a model of one of the wooden viaducts that survive on the branch to Maldon. There are two published drawings that I know off There are several books with photographs and I have a collection of my own taken over a period of many years. Looking at these shows evidence of at least four major rebuilds and several minor changes. Even in after closure changes have occurred both after the great storm and some later repairs. The end spans were filled in, the supports for the main beams have been modified and then modified again so that they are now more like the original than they were around 1960. As my version is set between 1958 and 1963 to allow both steam and diesel operation how should I go about it? I modified the internal structure for simplicity and used the width and height dimensions for the various spans. I then added the bracing aiming to make a typical arrangement rather than an actual one at a specific date. In reality even the sections vary along the length of the viaduct. I have since building it altered parts several times as I have worked on the scenery and found further details. It contains errors. Is it more accurate as a representation than the available drawings? Probably. Starting again I could build a more accurate version based on 1960 but just how much visible difference would the average person detect? It has given me a lot of enjoyment and makes a decent setting to display stock. Bernard Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
34theletterbetweenB&D Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 ...Of course, having built it, someone will come along with the drawing you need... So true. After completing my scratchbuilt LNER standard cattle wagon without benefit of drawing, 6 months later Mr Tatlow's first single volume survey of LNER wagons appeared. I'd claim for mine that it beats the Oxford RTR on having the correct assymetry in the partitioned end, but otherwise... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackRat Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 It all depends on what you mean by accurate, as unless we are going for super dooper accuracy (such as a large scale live steam fully engineered jobby) then really nothing we do is accurate as such. Even the most 'accurate' model is an interpretation of some sort, and we could find fault with anything if we really looked hard enough. I once overheard someone berating a layout owner of a very nice scale model of a South Wales station that they knew well, as the trees modelled had a different array of branches to,the ones modelled....... So go ahead and enjoy what you do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Captain Kernow Posted January 17, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 17, 2017 I think perhaps that you might be surprised just how many people have actually done what you are contemplating doing. If it were me, and I wanted a model of that particular prototype enough, I'd use all the research material available to me, even if that was just a couple of photos from the internet, and use my own experience and modelling judgement to fill in the missing bits. Many of us have done similar. I once built what I described as a GWR 'Bulldog' using a City of Truro chassis and footplate and a K's 'Bulldog' boiler casting. Someone even bought it from me! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim V Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 I think perhaps that you might be surprised just how many people have actually done what you are contemplating doing. If it were me, and I wanted a model of that particular prototype enough, I'd use all the research material available to me, even if that was just a couple of photos from the internet, and use my own experience and modelling judgement to fill in the missing bits. Many of us have done similar. I once built what I described as a GWR 'Bulldog' using a City of Truro chassis and footplate and a K's 'Bulldog' boiler casting. Someone even bought it from me! Have your standards improved since then Captain? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackRat Posted January 17, 2017 Share Posted January 17, 2017 My very good friend, Pete Totman is a very talented modeller. He models in S, O gauge Broad Gauge, and other minority scales. He scratchbuilds the most exquisite rolling stock and locos, often to commission, and often from only 1 existing photograph. I can't see any expert arguing the toss, tho no doubt there's always some know all who is able to predict what the other side looked like and what the colour was from a single faded photograph from 1880! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
John_Miles Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 These days with the advent of CAD coupled to 3D printing, it is possible to produce truly scale rivets in 4mm scale. Many of them are so small that I can't see them and I suspect I have been building things in brass and nickel silver for years with rivets which are well overscale, possibly double the size they should be. So probably many people who thought they were producing a good representation of the real thing were getting their rivets wrong. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sir douglas Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 do you want photos and drawings for a NER inspection car Here is an article with photos from The engineer, 3rd April 1908 http://www.gracesguide.co.uk/images/7/74/Er19080403a.pdf and a second article with a drawing from 1st May http://www.gracesguide.co.uk/images/8/82/Er19080501a.pdf Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rue_d_etropal Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 every model is a compromise and the biggest, most common is the gauge. Every OO gauge model is wrong gauge, yet many try to pretend it is not, and some don't even realise. It is the elephant in the room many try to ignore, and how ever many rivets you count, it wil still be there. In some ways with r2r models being so good, it is getting worse. For me capturing the feel is more important, but I am experimenting with British HO using 3D printing. Doesn't stop me modelling in many other scales and gauges. In some cases I choose scale to fit gauge. For those modelling narrow gauge,then many in OO9 and O16.5 have to make compromises and stretch some designs to fit the wider gauges. It is surpringly difficult, having done it for some of my own 3D printed designs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
burgundy Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 I know that some Sharp Brothers 2-2-2 locos were converted into tank engines, but I don't know (and rather doubt if anyone ever will know) whether this particular kind of Sharpie is an appropriate starting point. The process was documented on RMWeb a few years ago and the end result looks like this. I have tried my best, but, without the benefit fo a Tardis, I will never know how successfully I have represented an actual prototype. Best wishes Eric Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sir douglas Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 every model is a compromise and the biggest, most common is the gauge. Every OO gauge model is wrong gauge, yet many try to pretend it is not, and some don't even realise. It is the elephant in the room many try to ignore, and how ever many rivets you count, it wil still be there. In some ways with r2r models being so good, it is getting worse. For me capturing the feel is more important, but I am experimenting with British HO using 3D printing. Doesn't stop me modelling in many other scales and gauges. In some cases I choose scale to fit gauge. For those modelling narrow gauge,then many in OO9 and O16.5 have to make compromises and stretch some designs to fit the wider gauges. It is surpringly difficult, having done it for some of my own 3D printed designs. i laugh a lot whenever i hear or read somebody describe their OO layout as finescale OO scales to 4' 1 1/2" which is perfect for pre 1881 4' 1" Middleton railway but not for standard gauge Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Huw Griffiths Posted January 18, 2017 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted January 18, 2017 do you want photos and drawings for a NER inspection car Here is an article with photos from The engineer, 3rd April 1908 http://www.gracesguide.co.uk/images/7/74/Er19080403a.pdf and a second article with a drawing from 1st May http://www.gracesguide.co.uk/images/8/82/Er19080501a.pdf Many thanks - greatly appreciated (also downloaded / saved - and relevant stuff printed out). The 1908 car (or a copy of a three quarter view, in a book by the late David Jenkinson) was indeed what started this whole quest for me. This was later followed by references (in other books and on the internet) to this - the 1912 cars - and the 1923 "model". Thanks to your references, I've now got access to usable drawings for the 1908 car. This also gave me some pointers, which allowed me to find some rather useful stuff on the 1912 car (in the May 10th, 1912 edition, if anyone else wishes to follow up). It also gives me more of a chance of building something I'd be happy with. For various reasons, time will tell what happens - but I'm extremely grateful for your trouble. Before today, I'd never heard of the Grace's Guide website - I suspect I might soon be spending a lot of time there. every model is a compromise and the biggest, most common is the gauge. Every OO gauge model is wrong gauge, yet many try to pretend it is not, and some don't even realise. It is the elephant in the room many try to ignore, and how ever many rivets you count, it wil still be there. In some ways with r2r models being so good, it is getting worse. i laugh a lot whenever i hear or read somebody describe their OO layout as finescale OO scales to 4' 1 1/2" which is perfect for pre 1881 4' 1" Middleton railway but not for standard gauge These are some of the issues which make wary of building models - even more so of "going public". Of course, when I'm considering modelling obscure prototypes, I'm conscious that there's even less chance of me completing them to a standard that I'd be willing to own up to. As for the railcars, it's likely to be a while before I make any decisions - I don't want to rush (and regret at my leisure). Many thanks. Regards, Huw. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sir douglas Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 but I'm extremely grateful for your trouble. your welcome, it was not trouble at all as ive already got these 2 downloaded so i just went to find you the links to them, Before today, I'd never heard of the Grace's Guide website - I suspect I might soon be spending a lot of time there. i found it a few years ago and have been through nearly all them, and not just the Engineer but also Engineering, ive got the ones with my favourite articles downloaded Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Saunders Posted January 18, 2017 Share Posted January 18, 2017 The problem of building or modifying is you know exactly where the compromises are! Mark Saunders Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Johnster Posted January 18, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 18, 2017 i laugh a lot whenever i hear or read somebody describe their OO layout as finescale OO scales to 4' 1 1/2" which is perfect for pre 1881 4' 1" Middleton railway but not for standard gauge Actually it's a scale half inch out for pre 1881 Middleton, but I agree about 00 finescale, while sort of understanding what it means... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Captain Kernow Posted January 19, 2017 RMweb Gold Share Posted January 19, 2017 Have your standards improved since then Captain? Well, it was many years ago now, Tim. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
5050 Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 i laugh a lot whenever i hear or read somebody describe their OO layout as finescale OO scales to 4' 1 1/2" which is perfect for pre 1881 4' 1" Middleton railway but not for standard gauge By 'eck Sam, you'll be going Scale7 if you'e not careful In most cases regarding comments about authenticity - Rule 1 applies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
28XX Posted January 19, 2017 Share Posted January 19, 2017 For my tuppenceworth, any lacking information should be made up with practicable engineering design. Perhaps not derived with shear force and bending moment calcs, but allowances made. Using the op as an example, given the known dimensions of engine and transmission components of the era, the general layout can be deduced, fuel tank designed and positioned, chassis rails drawn on etc etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.